Abortion Opponents Vow to Keep Fighting After Miss. Voters Rejected ‘Personhood’ Initiative
- Posted on November 9, 2011 at 7:32am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
JACKSON, Miss. (The Blaze/AP) — Pro-life advocates were dealt a hard blow last night after Bible Belt voters in Mississippi defeated the so-called “personhood” initiative. But abortion opponents appear undeterred, saying that they’re still pursuing life-at-fertilization ballot initiatives in six other states following the major loss.
While aired prior to yesterday’s polling results, the following NBC video provides an overview of the initiative and the intense debate surrounding it:
The “personhood” proposal was intended to prompt a legal challenge aimed at overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established a legal right to abortion.
Keith Mason is co-founder of Personhood USA, which pushed the Mississippi measure. The Colorado-based group is trying to put initiatives on 2012 ballots in Florida, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Nevada and California. Voters in Colorado rejected similar proposals in 2008 and 2010.
Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said the initiatives represent an “extreme, dangerous and direct assault” on abortion rights.
Mason told The Associated Press that Personhood USA might revive efforts for another ballot initiative in Mississippi.
Speaking of the failure in Mississippi on Tuesday, Mason said, “it’s not because the people are not pro-life. It’s because Planned Parenthood put a lot of misconceptions and lies in front of folks and created a lot of confusion.”
Planned Parenthood Federation of America said in a statement: “Mississippi voters rejected the so-called `personhood’ amendment because they understood it is government gone too far, and would have allowed government to have control over personal decisions that should be left up to a woman, her family, her doctor and her faith, including keeping a woman with a life-threatening pregnancy from getting the care she needs, and criminalizing everything from abortion to common forms of birth control such as the pill and the IUD.”
Below, listen to radio host Ann Fisher discuss the issue, while bringing in individuals from all sides of the discussion:
The so-called “personhood” initiative was rejected by more than 55 percent of Mississippi voters, falling far short of the threshold needed for it to be enacted.
The measure divided the medical and religious communities and caused some of the most ardent abortion opponents, including Republican Gov. Haley Barbour, to waver with their support. One group that stood opposed to the measure, VoteNoOn26.org, created an ad in which Barbour’s own words were used to make its case:
Opponents said the measure would have made birth control, such as the morning-after pill or the intrauterine device, illegal. More specifically, the ballot measure called for abortion to be prohibited “from the moment of fertilization” – wording that opponents suggested would have deterred physicians from performing in vitro fertilization because they would fear criminal charges if an embryo doesn’t survive.
Opponents also said supporters were trying to impose their religious beliefs on others by forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies, including those caused by rape or incest.
Amy Brunson voted against the measure, in part because she has been raped. She also has friends and family that had children through in vitro fertilization and she was worried this would end that process.
“The lines are so unclear on what may or may not happen. I think there are circumstances beyond everybody‘s control that can’t be regulated through an amendment,” said Brunson, a 36-year-old dog trainer and theater production assistant from Jackson.
Buddy Hairston, 39, took his 8-year-old triplets to a precinct outside Jackson to hold signs supporting the initiative.
“Unborn children are being killed on a daily basis in our state and country, and it’s urgent that we protect them,” said Hairston, a forestry consultant.
Mississippi already has tough abortion regulations and only one clinic where the procedures are performed, making it a fitting venue for a national movement to get abortion bans into state constitutions.
The state’s largest Christian denomination, the Mississippi Baptist Convention, backed the proposal through its lobbying arm, the Christian Action Commission.
“We mourn with heaven tonight over the loss of Initiative 26, which would have provided the hope of life for thousands of God’s unborn babies in Mississippi,” said the commission’s director, the Rev. Jimmy Porter. “Instead the unborn in Mississippi will continue to be led down on a path of destruction to horrible deaths both inside their mothers and in laboratories.”
The bishops of the Episcopal Diocese of Mississippi and the General Conference of the United Methodist Church opposed the initiative.
Bishop Joseph Latino of the Catholic Diocese of Jackson, a church traditionally against abortion, issued a statement neither supporting nor opposing the initiative. The Mississippi State Medical Association took a similar step, while other medical groups opposed it.
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 680 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 639 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 523 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 360 Comments
Have You Seen the Giant ‘Sand Obama’ Sculpture in Charlotte? 312 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 144 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 185 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 146 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Scathing New Ad Capitalizes on Rep. Ryan‘s ’Fading Obama Posters’ Remark 124 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 144 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (85)
devan95
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 4:59pmIf the Supreme Court upholds the “ObamaCare” law, it will then be impossible to continue to maintain that Rowe v. Wade is a credible decision. Why? Because Rowe was based on a right to privacy when it comes to medical matters. ObamaCare, however, REQUIRES that all medical records, with few exceptions, be provided to the federal government. So they can’t have it both ways and either ObamaCare or Rowe must go. We either have a right to privacy or we don’t. Check mate. Game, set, match!
Report Post »RossPoldark
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 4:09pmToo bad the baby didn’t have a right to choose. Jesus said, as Christians, we are either for him or against him. There is not middle of the road.
Report Post »RossPoldark
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 4:02pmsquaw: I am a Christian, and in my faith there is no death, but only moving to another dimension in its evolution to become one with the creator. In my Christian faith, the soul is life, and the body merely a shell. Not all good Christians brought harm to your ancestors. Some tried living in harmony, but were killed by native Americans. In the US, many ethnic people suffered at the hands of violence and bigotry, not just the Native American, but hopefully we are all evolving away from that now, and not living in the past. We of course must never forget past history, for those who do are bound to repeat it.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 4:31pmI whole heartedly agree…we as a whole have failed in the instruction that we were given…the four tribes have not come together as we were told…The Creator has warned us twice…the third time he will shake the world with both hands…That is the way we were taught…very similar to your revelations…our faith isn‘t that different in it’s basis..we should never debate the Creator…Law, yes….but never faith! I can’t stand here and say this person will be saved and this one will burn for the life they have led..it isn’t my place, not my judgement. To me there is no difference in our color, we are all of the same circle..brothers …sisters…children of 1 Creator. My people were sent here after the flood we were given 2 tablets that are the word of the Creator. 2 Tablets went to Tibet, 2 to Africa and 2 to Europe…Red man was given the earth…yellow man the wind…white man fire..black man water…we were to learn all that was to be learned then come together in the sacred circle and teach what we had learned…we have failed. May the rainbow touch your shoulder in your journey.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 3:55pmThank God even in Mississippi people had more sense than to vote for this stupidity.
Report Post »SaraD
Posted on November 16, 2011 at 1:54amYes, I am surprised but relieved.
Report Post »alrunner58
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:57pmI agree it should of failed. Life does start at conception in my view, BUT there were too many consequences such as the miscarriage aspect, the birth control, car accident, i.e. accidental death. That is a concern of mine the unnecessary prosecution of women. I thought the birth control pill “prevented” pregnancy.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 3:17pmMost birth control does prevent conception (condoms, the pill). Copper IUDs may allow conception but prevent implantation; the cells are just ejected via menses. The morning after pill does the same, except with hormones; even if the sperm impregnates an egg, it won’t take.
Report Post »christelle
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 7:40pmThe law also did not allow for Ectopic Pregnancies. If you do not treat those, the mom WILL die, fallopian tubes do not stretch …there is NO way for the fetus and mom to survive.
I am Pro-Life, but I would have voted against this the way it was worded
Report Post »mcmeador
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:37pmAll of this silliness about, “oh no, women are going to be investigated and prosecuted for having normal miscarriages now,” is a bunch of crap. It’s already illegal in Mississippi to purposefully cause a miscarriage, and you don’t see women being investigated when they have one. These were just a bunch of scare tactics dreamed up by the pro-choice movement. They knew they had no chance if they framed this as a pro-life vs. pro-choice debate in a conservative state, so instead they tried to come up with any reason they could to scare the pro-lifers out of voting for it.
The ballot initiative was very simple and specified that this definition only applied to the word “person” as it appeared in Article III of the Mississippi Constitution. It’s not like if this passed, then suddenly Mississippi would be a police state where women couldn’t use normal birth control and would be thrown in jail for miscarrying. Give me break. Even if this amendment could have been interpreted in such a way, you would still have to have legislators (elected by the people) who would pass the appropriate laws, prosecutors who would enforce those laws, and judges who would uphold them. It’s just not going to happen.
With that said, it may not have even been constitutional considering the rules laid out for the amendment process. But let’s not fall for all the ridiculous scare tactics that originated from the pro-choice movement. Use some common sense.
Report Post »panick
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:21pmSo the Episcopalians, the Methodists, and the Catholics did not get in line to push a basic tenet of their faith – right to life. The Apostate Church abounds doesn’t it ….. Don’t look for many of these folks to get Raptured. Thsy can stay down here for 7 years and deal with Obama ( who I think may be the AntiChrist) and the other libturds. You can almost smell the sulfur !!!
Report Post »RossPoldark
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 4:06pmPanick, sad to say, there are many cafeteria Christians in all Christian faiths. They think merely by believing they are save, and they do not realize we have to work at it continuously. There are a lot of cafeteria Christians who pick and chose what tickles their fancy. They try to bend God to suit their needs rather than changing themselves to suit his need.
Report Post »christelle
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 7:42pmPanick if we hold God’s word to be truth Obama can not be the Anit-christ because he does not fit ALL of the prophecy.
But as my husbands LOVES to say:)…….“He makes an excellent John the Baptist”
Report Post »weeblewacker1
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 9:56amwell,i keep looking and looking,but i just can’t find in the bible anything that says abortion is wrong!
Report Post »SaraD
Posted on November 16, 2011 at 2:03am@Rosspoldark You are absolutely right. I thought I originated that term “cafeteria christian” they take what they like and leave others. I must admit those crazy Westburo baptists DO know their bible. So many christians do not believe in the old testament yet that is where the ten comandment come from. and Jesus embraced it. Luke 16:17 NAB, but mainly this verse came to mind Matthew 5:17 NAB
Report Post »dnewton
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:29pmI think the wording was complex because there are a few people that believe that a clone would have no soul. Fortunately, I am only related by marriage to one of them. This would create a whole class of second class citizenship operated by the SPCA, I guess. There is no substantial cloning example among complex animals but there may be a day when this will come up. I think that the cloning part should have been left out and handled if it ever becomes a realistic possibility.
Report Post »rose-ellen
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 4:11pmThat life begins at conception is a biological fact. A secular government has the right to affirm in law the constituional principal [and even without a constituion-the foundational belief that life [human] shouid not be destroyed. That includes prohibion against the pill that allows for fertilization.[fertilization meaning the formation of a zygote-not necessarily implantation] A society where life[human] is considered a good thing and not something that needs to be destroyed can and should be a cultural norm Unfortunately-we have allowed the view that life[human] is not inherently good leading to laws which permit the killing of humans[abortion] A horrendous evil. Too bad people have been brainwashed with feminist propaganda into believing that human life is not inherently good[value]..Another set back in this culture of ends justifying the the means -which permeates our culture now.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:14pm@Copatriot…may we always have the freedom in this country to debate the Law….and may it never be that we have to stand side by side to shed blood for that freedom..I will send blessings on the winds to you and yours…
One if By Land TEA!
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:28pmMany Thanks Squaw! I hope you are right about not needing to shed blood for our rights but I fear the day is coming that we will be called on to die for our beliefs. To that end, I hope I am worthy and strong in death should that be my fate.
I will pray for you and yours! Many blessings to you! ; )
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:13pmIf it is scientifically proven that human life begins at conception, wouldn’t it be considered murder to abort (regardless of the religious implications)?
Report Post »cjmartel
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:51pmYou are absolutely correct. If a pregnant women is killed in a homicide, the killer is always charged with two counts of murder, yet a woman can go to a clinic and murder her unborn baby!
Report Post »The U.S. Constituion guarantees the right to “LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS”, notice the first word is LIFE.
To those who do not want the religious implications, well too bad, our country was founded on the principles of Christianity, and to go further, our founding fathers understood that the only way this government can survive is an adherence to the tenets of Christianity, you know, those pesky bill of rights, things like the right to LIFE!
What is really appalling is that most of the liberals have more concern over an animal than they do over another human being, that is disgusting!!
In summation, that which is in the womb is a HUMAN BEING, not a choice.
SaraD
Posted on November 16, 2011 at 2:12am@CJMartel actually our country was not founded on christianity. If that were true this would not be an issue, it would be long outlawed and we would be living with the endorsment of slavery, and treating women as property.
Report Post »Our founding fathers fled religous persecusion, and purposely left it out of our contitution. That is why we don’t have an official religion. Many of our founding fathers were not christians.
“The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the Christian Religion.” 1797 the treaty of Tripoli, signed by President Washington, and approved by the Senate of the United States
guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:08pm@Joe123…you call me a liberal and so I smile…I am further the right than you…I am the Extreme Right Wing those liberals keep screaming about.
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:17pmThe “far right” and the “far left” are both of a socialist frame of mind, aren’t they?
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:00pmNo…I believe that freedom is precious…I am a constitutionalist.. in todays enviroment that is the far right.
BrotherWill
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:03pmSee if we were liberal, after we lost the election we would be starting recall campaigns against everyone who disagreed with us.
Report Post »yancie
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:37amThey are all going too hell . Oh well more room in Heaven for me :D I don’t want any stinking libturds near me anyway.
Report Post »TOMSERVO
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:09pmYes indeed, that is the attitude that will get you up there with the big guy. Keep it up!
Report Post »weeblewacker1
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 10:04amsay yancie,it looks like your going to hell too!! along with all the people that post on here.ALL of you are ignoring Jesus. All of you pick and choose out of the bible what you will except and won’t except.If the bible is the word of god,then you all are going against his words,and are going to hell.just saying…
Report Post »EqualJustice
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:08amThe liberals just made too good of a case about “unintentional consequences” and scared many people! It should have been passed through by the elected legislators with clear definitions.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:19amIt didn’t just get defeated it got thrashed 58% to 42%. You can‘t be selective on where you want the government to limit individual’s rights. Similar to the biased worded right of health care choice in OH, this issue was a waste of taxpayer time and money. Federal law would prevail in both instances. Which is why we need Federal laws in these areas, to protect the actual citizens in a state from the ideological zealots. LIBERTY, JUSTICE AND PRIVACY FOR ALL.
Report Post »PooRBuckToe
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:07am@GUNTOTINSQUAW
You seem to forget that all humans have the right to LIFE, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
When you ignore the violation of the rights of others your rights violation is just right around the corner.
The violators of life no matter at what stage will not “just leave you alone”.
Also just because children went to bed hungry last night and will every night until the Lord comes, doesn’t mean we should ignore the innocent unborn whose right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness are being threatened. Both should be defended.
The law and faith are inseparable. All law is the legislation of someones morality based on their religeon/spirituality. Whether you like it or not they have always been and always will be that way.
The U.S. DOI & Constitution were written for the protection of the people’s faith /spirituality and other things.
Attention all lovers of our
Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution we must all hang tough together or we will hang separately.
We are not islands unto ourselves. what we do and dont do has consequences.
HermanCain2012
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:23amI guess it would depend on what one describes as “LIFE”….Even in the biblical term…life is given with a soul…it is the same as my faith….a soul is not placed until birth…I have no problem with limits, as limits should always exist…but this law was based on FAITH….a Christian belief of conception…which goes against the very teaching of the Creator..Which is why I but no faith in King James opinion…and since you say “The law and faith are inseparable” then you should have no problem with Sharia being the law of this land. As it is faith used as law….inseparable. I have no desire to debate religion…But again we are talking LAW! That is different…may you practice your faith as you deem fit, I’ll defend your right to do so..until you put your faith as my law. And no child in this country should go to bed hungry…but that is faith..not law.
Report Post »ChiRho4Life
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:49amSquaw…did you forget about the part of the Bible where God says “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. … Before you were formed in the body of your mother I had knowledge of you ” Jeremiah 1:5….that’s a soul God is talking about, not just life.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:03pm@Chiro…did you miss the conversation that said I don’t follow your revised version of of Gods word…So you may quote King James New Version and his pope all you want…makes me little difference.
Report Post »ChiRho4Life
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:08pmDIdn’t miss your King James reference at all…I wasn’t quoting from the King James, rather from the Tanakh.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 3:16pm@Chiro…since you wanted to jump in to Copatriot and my discussion…perhaps you should read ALL of the conversation…I believe you will find I said the soul is life, but if you quote your book the soul isn’t placed until birth!! The body is merely a placement…so to answer your question..yes the Creator would know you before your placement in a body…as it is your soul that exist before and after and it is your soul that would be “his image” and Jeremiah 1:5 is also in the new testament King James “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.” He was a prophet…but it was a lesson and you did the typical..you took 1 sentence and said here is the proof…read the whole story in context. I said I didn’t follow it..I never said I didn’t know it.
Report Post »PooRBuckToe
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 2:11am@GuntotinSquaw
The law and faith are inseparable. All law is the legislation of someones morality based on their religeon/spirituality. Whether you like it or not they have always been and always will be that way.
This is how it is in all countries on earth.
Laws based on faiths of vengence and hate and where women are considered less than men you will get a society of enslavement and anguish.
Laws based on faith/s of forgiveness and reconciliation and equality of beings you will live in a society of liberty and happiness.
The United States started out perfect in ideals but not practice. (Slavery, Native Americans).
We as a country still have a lot of work to do to live out our founding ideals.
Rule of law enforced by constitutionally thinking people will maintain our liberty.
“a soul is not placed until birth”
Jeremiah 1:5
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
And before you were born I consecrated you;
(the NASB is considered by most bible scholars to be the most accurate word for word translation)
All I am I am because of my Creator.
Report Post »All I believe is because of what He has given in His word.
To be studied and proven true by hard work, investigation and living it out in life.
LondoMollari
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:04amThis is disappointing, but, I’m not so sure the government should mandate someone to die if their life is in danger. That should be the only choice when it comes to abortion.
Aside from that, maybe we need to smaller with making abortion illegal and go from there. I know it’d be nice to kill it all in one lethal blow, but I think we have to be more realisitic as well. 55% in MS rejecting this probably isn’t a great thing and we need to do better for the sake of the unborn.
Report Post »christelle
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 8:05pmAs I understood it that was a big concern with the Christians who voted against it, they were afraid of the ramifications it would have on things like Ectopic Pregnancy
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:04amWhy is this in the faith section? Hmmm. makes one think of the motives here.
Report Post »Lloyd Drako
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:49amIf the proposition had won, and if the unborn were entitled to personhood in Mississippi, would the Census Bureau have to count them as inhabitants of the state? Could they conceivably affect the state’s Congressional representation?
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:11amAn “unborn” being a “person” is a contradiction of terms… not Constitutional, which states a President must be “Born”… and creates Criminals of All Women, as contributing to Manslaughter or Murder, as 2 of 3 of every Fertized Egg simply passes out of the body, and as MisCarriages happen for Various Reasons.
Report Post »Simply and Rationally, a Fetus cannot have Rights until it is Born and separated from the Host Person… otherwise the Rights of the Fetus would infringe upon the Rights of the Mother!
While I know that some Faith that Christ was Conceived as a God… God, the Infinite & Eternal, cannont fit into a Finite Mortal… and Christ would have been Born with all the Knowledge of God, and would never need to Learn nor be Taught anything!
Sorry… but we must live in Reality!
copatriots
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:20amWow……it is stunning the depths a person will sink to justify their depravity. In your wildest dreams, do you truly think the Founders ever once considered that the government would legislate, support and endorse a mother killing her own baby in the womb? Having read much of their words and beliefs, I can assure you, LUKER, they would be disgusted by the society we have become a mere 200 years later. And they NEVER would have considered needing to protect the unborn babies against their own mothers. What a very weak argument……..a President being born in this country to justify when life begins. Wow….just wow.
Report Post »truth1966
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:29amLukeRW – your arguement doesn’t hold any water. Children that are born die for natural causes too and we don’t hold the mother responsible for their deaths either. But if you contribute to the death (ie. IVF or morning after pill ) of a concieved person, then we should be held accountable. I agree with you we need to live in reality and be responsible for our actions.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:14pmOK, guys… think it out…
Report Post »The only words in the Constitution that reference We the People… are “men” and “born”… and if Women had to have a Constitutional Amendment to vote, because of the word “men”… then, you must change the Constitution, because of the word “born”.
Once you create Laws…. someone will find others in Violation of the Law… thereby you are subjecting Women to a determination upon a MisCarriage to detect that it was Natural or Induced.
And, once you negate that Cutting the Umbilical Cord separates a part of a Woman’s Body (forming a seceond and unique individual)… you subject Women to a form of Slavery, telling them what they can or cannot do with their Body.
Agree? No? Then I think… Women should propose a Law that Male Semen lost in Masturbation is the Murder of Potental Conception Material… and, as found in the Bible, a Sin!
Do we desire battles upon what any, every, person can do with their own bodies?
truth1966
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:40amI am a Catholic and at first I was appauled at the lack of conviction of the Catholic Bishop in Jackson Mississippi as stated in this report, but I further went and looked at his very public response to the issue – http://www.jacksondiocese.org/diocese/files/Personhood%20Letter.pdf. I have to admit I was at the outset angered at the lack of support but I do not know the entire details of the issue and whether or not this proposition would reduce abortions in the state or just increase litigation around it. I too believe the best way to fight abortion, contraceptive devices affecting the child or IVF is to change the sentiment of the folks and then the issue will automatically turn from this culture of death we have now to a culture of life.
Report Post »mend54jc
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 4:27pmWhat is my people?
Report Post »ChiRho4Life
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:27am556,0000 US children need families…..should Child and Protective Services be involved in that? Oh, wait….my mistake…that would be the government sticking its nose into a social issue….
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:33amMy people never needed the government to take care of it’s children…until the “Christian” civilized us…THANKS!!!
Report Post »ChiRho4Life
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:39amSo, i guess all of those 556,000 are ‘your people’, then? or do you think that no-one but ‘your people’ deserve to live? and if you don’t like civilization, you can always give up all the modern conveniences brought to you by ‘whitey’ and go live in the forests, as did your ancestors.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:32pm@Chiro…556,000 is the number of children in foster care…in need of a permanent home…my people take of there own children…no native child is in government foster care..and I do live in the forest on the very land my people have been on for 10,000 years…roughly 7 miles from the original village…and your modern conviences will do you no good when the next great shaking occurs…what will you do when you can no longer run to the store??
Report Post »ClaytonBigsby
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:26amI am against abortion for convenience. But, I could never vote for a law that outlawed abortion due to incest, rape or protection of the mother.
Report Post »Tepeyac
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:44amSo now you would compound the crime of incest and rape with a murder of an innocent person?
Report Post »SimpleTruths
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:17pm@TEPEYAC
Report Post »I don’t see it as compounding the crime, you do, that’s the difference.
copatriots
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:13am“It’s okay to kill a baby in the womb when?” Ray Comfort
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y2KsU_dhwI
Report Post »mike_trivisonno
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:51amThe ritual sacrifice of the babies we call “abortion” will not be stopped using the legislative tools of a system designed to promote it.
There is a mountain of dead babies who will not know this amazing experience. Because their moms were taught it is ok to murder. As long as the killing take place in her womb, she is taught that it is normal. Killing a baby in your womb is the farthest thing from normal.
Report Post »drew6787
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:10amWell said my man. I become very sad when I hear people zealously defend abortion. I work with a pro-life women’s center in Ohio and it is amazing the good that they do. They truly listen to the women and offer them ongoing support if they keep the child. The women who work there are on the front lines and they are saving babies!
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:18amHow sick and morbid can a society be when they kill the most precious and innocent among us for the sole purpose that they were irresponsible when they chose to have sex. There are countless ways to prevent a pregnancy prior to having sex. And yet people cannot be responsible enough to prevent a pregnancy beforehand versus viciously murdering the baby growing inside them.
May God bless the people fighting for “personhood” and may He have mercy on us for the atrocity we allowed to become law in this country.
Report Post »dj109
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:46am@NHWINTER
Couldn’t have said it better…
Report Post »jzs
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:38amEven in the conservative state of Louisiana people rejected government telling them they can’t use birth control, that spontaneous abortions would be subject to a murder investigation, and that a Dr. could not treat an ectopic pregnancy without fear of prosecution.
So much for the idea that the TP support small government and less intrusion in people’s lives. Seems they actually want the government inside the uterus making sure no crimes are committed there by an illegal IUD.
Report Post »christelle
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 8:11pmSpontaneus abortions subject to murder investigations???? WOW that would make a heart breaking event way worse on the mom. I worked in OB-GYN and most of the time there is no known reason for a mom to miscary (and yeah the medical term IS spontaneous abortion) and most of those women go on to have normal pregnancies. Sometimes we find a cause but that tends to be things like cervical problems which ARE treatable and NOT mom’s fault.
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 8:47amTakes a lot of work and prayers to defeat evil. God bless them for trying. Shame on the churches that did not help to pass this initiative.
Report Post »aarontbarksdale
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:00amI would have supported it IF the wording weren’t so vague. I could have allowed for the eventual outlaw of birth control. I was not a member of the “Healthy Families” or the “Vote NO on 26” movement, I read the bill and did research on birth control. If they would have limited the birth control they would outlaw to ONLY IUD’s, AND if they still allowed the MOTHER control to make decisions in the event of “the baby or the mother” situations…had they made that clearer, I WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED it. But just like the vagueness of some of the Obamacare’s regulations could lead to unintended consequences…THAT is why I couldn’t support it. I hate abortion, but I LOATHE unnecessary government controls. Hate me if you want, but I made a very hard decisions after much prayer.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:03amPlease keep your rewritten King James Version of Gods word out of my business and in your own church…People like you are why the left will continue to win seats…we are tired of you holier than thou busybodies putting your opinion in our business…keep the government out of social issues!!
One If By Land TEA!!
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:05amAaron – I understand. I hope the initiative comes up again with clearer wording. Life does begin at conception and needs to be viewed as sacred. Thank you for your explanation.
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:33amGuntotin – You would have no business to keep anyone out of if your mother had aborted you. They already interferred in people’s rights when they let Roe vs. Wade enter the government. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness – there would be no liberty, no pursuit of happiness without Life. If we can’t stand for something so crucial, so essentially basic as Life and its sacredness, nothing else really matters. Doesn’t matter what faith you are or if you have no faith, life is essential to all of us.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:54am@NHWinter…Had my mother made that choice I would never had known…Kepp your bible in your own business and quit shoving it down the throats of the rest of us…Roe vs. Wade was a PRIVACY ruling…No-one is forcing you to have an abortion so it doesn’t affect YOU at all!! Keep your nose and the government out of my business. Again I will say…the left wing will continue to win if people like you cannot learn bounderies…your right ends where mine begin! I promise you would not like me shoving my spiritual beliefs down your throat, and you Christians are responsible for how much blood spilt??? How many children taken from “heathen” home to be taught “good Christian values”??? Don’t lecture me about Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness…It is MY life…MY liberty and MY happiness…The fact is we will all die and your opinion won’t change that fact…there are so many better things you could be doing…like taking in some of the 556,000 American children that need a family.
Report Post »4truth2all
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 9:55amYo Guntotin:
Report Post »Sounds like YOU are ready and able to protect yourself, Should not an unborn child have the same right to protection. That bible that you so dispise and have no need of is the very reason for your hardened heart and unwillingness to protect those not able to do so. You are only interested in you. How unfortunate. It is NOT a social issue… it is an issue of taking life… which is called murder. The only thing that is social about it is the condition of a society that allows this to exist.
copatriots
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:25amSweet Guntotin, you can be forgiven, you know. I wonder…..if you were in Germany in the 1930′s, would you have looked aside when the Jews were horrifically murdered in the gas chambers? At what point would you have said what we are allowing as a society is wrong? Why is an innocent baby in the womb at fault for the fact that a woman and man had sex? And the price the innocent, faultless pays is a horrific death?
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:25amGuntotin – I did not mention the Bible and I am not trying to shove it down your throat. I said, faith or no faith, life is essential to us all. It seems you have a real problem with the Bible. Sorry about that, but it is your business. And, how would you know whether I took lots of children in our not? Do not make assumptions. Maybe you should do something better with your time than spout anger at people you don’t even know, or know what good they have done in their life.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:31am@truth…I don’t despise the bible…just don’t believe in a rewritten version of Gods word…How many children went to bed hungry in this country last night??? How many times have you paid rent and utilities for a woman bedridden due to complications in her pregnancy??? How many times have you emptied your wallet to give to the person with a sign??? How many abortions have you had??? It is not the bible that is the problem..it is the self-righteous bible thumpers that are! The “hardened heart” quote..is exactly what I’m talking about…You don’t know me or what spirituality I practice, but you will guess and judge…I give thanks to the spirit of the animal for sharing it‘s meat and leave a gift to it’s cousins, I house those who a roof, feed those that are hungry, hand money (even if I don’t have it to spare) to those that need it more…I wake up in the morning and say prayers to the creator of all things, by my faith, I live…you preach..there is the difference….it is not for me judge what sin that is between you and your creator, with the millions you people spend to overturn Roe vs. Wade…How many could you have housed, fed, clothed or just made a diference…. I will continue to live in peace with all spirits but that is my faith…and we are talking LAW!! Keep the 2 seperate!! The agreement has always been 1 Creator…that’s where we can agree, the rest stays in our place of worship.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:49am@ Copatriot…forgiven for what??? And are you truly wanting to compare the holocaust to something …Because I have family that would look at you like you are stupid… and ask “What do you think the good Christian did to my people?” Do you think it was different for my people?? I would have taken in the Jews..they are my brother….because that is my faith…my people tried to warn about Hitler…tried to warn about Japan…but what does a heathen know?
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:58amSquaw, take the blinders of your culture and history off for a moment. Am I responsible for my ancestors? Are you a victim to yours? I don’t for one second think that how the Europeans treated Native Americans was correct or fair. But what more can be done about that now? My comparison to Germany is that their society essentially did the same thing to the Jews as what happened to your ancestors. The government committed these atrocities and the people did nothing.
Do you believe murder is wrong? I have no doubt you do. Why is killing an innocent baby okay? You, of all people, should hate the government permitting the killing innocent babies.
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:35am@Copatriot…I do not hold you or yours responsible…but please don’t ask such foolish questions as what I would do for my brother the Jew…I would stand by your side just the same, take in your family and love you as my brother…but when you ask this…”Do you believe murder is wrong? I have no doubt you do. Why is killing an innocent baby okay? You, of all people, should hate the government permitting the killing innocent babies.”…you have very little understanding of my faith or my people….What do you define as murder?? Innocent is depending on which side you stand..example…would it have been murder to remove all the seed of the Nazis?? I guess that would depend on if you were a Nazi. And a baby is birthed..it has a soul…it is life…but again the line is crossing between faith and law as it is not life without a soul.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:55amSquaw, thank you for your dialog. For the life of me, I couldn’t understand how any thinking person could murder an innocent baby in the womb. You have certainly explained your belief. My question of comparing to the Jews was not foolish, it is a very logical question. I must admit I am stunned a person of Native American background believes killing a baby, at any stage, pre-birth is acceptable. My question for you is…..what if you are wrong about when a soul is given to a person? It is proven that children learn in the womb. How are they capable of learning if they have no soul? Why does the Creator (which you stated you believe in a Creator) create a life only to have it killed by it‘s mother because it has not experienced the breath of life on it’s own?
Again, Squaw, thank you for this conversation. We obviously disagree but you have at least explained how a woman can justify killing their own child. Nonetheless, I am saddened.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:18pmSquaw, I do have more questions if you will indulge me. You are correct that I do not know much about your people. But from what I did know (and you alluded to above), you believe animal have spirits and you give thanks for them. You are grateful for reproduction of animals for sustenance. What animal, besides human, in nature abort their own in untold numbers? What purpose does it serve in your beliefs to kill our own offspring? For the survival of your people, is it not important to have future generations? I am truly trying to understand.
If you were to change your beliefs that a baby is a person who the Creator gave life and is innocent prior to birth, would you defend the child’s life as much as you would have your ancestors or the Jews through Nazi-ism? Can you see how people who believe that baby is a person (with or without a soul yet) want to defend that child’s right to life because of their beliefs?
Report Post »guntotinsquaw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 12:58pm@Copatriot…But your question in itself crosses faith into law….if all had faith and followed the Creator in his divinity..there would be no need for abortion…but 1 should never regulate faith with law..You see in the Christian faith a homosexual is a corrupt sinner…in my faith..they are a blessing..given 2 spirits by the Creator…in the Christian faith..life begins at conception….in my faith..life is the soul…the body is merely a placement..Like death…there is no death for my people..just a change of being or worlds… Look at the stillborn…a soul became lost and couldn‘t find it’s placement…but that soul will come again. And yes many animals will kill their own young.
Report Post »4truth2all
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 6:02pmYo Guntotin:
Report Post »If I mis-understood your own words…. my apologies. I certainly was not preaching to or at you. What you accuse me of you yourself have done. I have given up almost everything I had to work with teenagers. I do not tell or expect others to do what I myself am not willing to do. I find it odd that you say what you say and then you turn around and walk away from those most unable to defend themselves. My creator tells me to help and speak out on their behave…..,there is only ONE creator… what retold stories to you trust in…. or am I preaching now……..